Tuesday, October 5, 2021

Questions for Kirsty Blackman

As you can see, Kirsty Blackman's eventual attempt to draw a line under this episode did not involve an apology - it was simply an announcement of a deletion without any explanation of either the original retweet or of the deletion itself.  That being the case, I don't think it's unreasonable that she should be invited to answer the following questions to clear the matter up rather more satisfactorily...

* Did you not read the tweet properly before retweeting it?  All of us have been guilty of that sort of carelessness at some point in time, but is that what you're claiming happened in this case?

* If you did read the tweet properly, why did you knowingly retweet a call for one of your MP colleagues to be expelled from the SNP?

* Do you, in fact, believe Joanna Cherry should be expelled?

* If you do believe Joanna Cherry should be expelled, why did you delete the retweet?

* Does your clarification imply that you want transphobes to be expelled, but that you accept that this principle does not apply to Joanna Cherry because she is plainly not transphobic?  If so, have you apologised to her for the confusion?

* Do you accept that calling for a colleague to be expelled, when that colleague is in fact in good standing, should in itself be a disciplinary offence?  If not, why not?

When Ms Cherry was sacked from the frontbench, I said that one of my big concerns was that it might prove to be merely a staging post, and that the next step would be to make it a little less unthinkable for spurious disciplinary action to be taken against her, with a view to eventually having her suspended or expelled.  That may have seemed a tad outlandish when I said it.  It looks a hell of a lot less outlandish now, and we're only a few short months further on.  The many decent people who decided to stay in the SNP after Alba broke away in the spring now need to stand up and be counted.  They don't need to lose their party - there's nothing inevitable about it.  But time may be running short.


  1. Under Sturgeon The SNP have morphed into the nasty party.

    GRA takes precedence over Independence, so Sturgeonite Blackman felt safe posting her dreadful tweet, in the knowledge she wouldn't be censured by the party

  2. And what of the 'person' behind the original tweet? I thought the SNP had a policy specifically outlawing this myopic nonsense?

    1. From what I can see, the SNP's policies and rules are flexibly and selectively applied, depending where particular members' loyalties are perceived to lie.

  3. I stood up - and walked away. This was only one of the reasons.

  4. It is of course a distortion of language to claim that people like JC are 'transphobic' because they disagree with the likes of Sturgeon and Blackman. Cherry has made clear on many occasions that she supports trans rights and it would be very surprising if she did'nt. What she does disagree with, in an area she has some expertise in, is the proposed legislation to help trans people. That is an argument about law, not about transphobia, and has no bearing on Cherry's personal views on trans people. Clearly there are valid arguments that changing the law may adversely affect other people's rights and if so there is a necessary debate to be had.
    Instead, we get hysterical abuse and witch hunts based on slogans like 'transphobia' by virtue signallers like the SNP clique at the top, where debate is a dirty word - are they debateophobic? Should they be slung out? Or should we just ban debate - hold on, the hate crime bill might do exactly that.
    Joanna Cherry is in a different intellectual league to the mediocre SNP hierarchy group think. No wonder they feel threatened by her, and take every opportunity to undermine her. Sisterly solidarity, eh?

    1. As an SNP member, I appreciate your highlighting this issue. Can be confusing for those of us who appreciate Joanna Cherry's legal skills and can't understand why the SNP hierarchy permit this damaging GRA obsession to the detriment of their main duties - governing the country, Covid and last but not least, independence.

    2. I don't support trans rights. There's no such thing. Humans have Human rights. Humans can't change sex. If you can change sex then by definition you are not human and have no rights.
      Do not give them an inch. Not one Angstrom. Never.

      Same goes for Yoons ant wetnats who think allowing a Million english to vote in Scotland is just being a jolly good sport and not committing National suicide.

    3. There aren’t a million English in Scotland. Not even close. This is getting silly and out of hand.

    4. According to the 2011 census 459,000 people in Scotland were born in England. Hard to imagine that 541,00 more have arrived since then. We will know the numbers when the new census is carried out but it is reasonable to think the number has increased but by how much?


    5. Well, I have seen a figure quoted of c50,000 'white settlers' arriving from the South each year so that would add up to 500,000 since 2011. This figure may well be apocryphal and I have no way of verifying it but I the flight of wealthy retirees from England to rural Scotland is definitely an issue for local communities by pushing up house prices while making no economic contribution to the area. Most of them are firm 'blood and soil' little Englanders (just look at ex-pat communities in Europe to see how willing they are to integrate with the local population) and regard Scotland as no more than a quaint backwater of England. Whether there's a million or half a million of them that's a lot of votes for queen and country we have to counter in any putative referendum.

      Ironically, James may find himself agreeing with Rev Stu on this issue but the Rev isn't right about everything - he's not the Blessed St.Nicola, you know!!! It's sad to see this driving a wedge between those of us who have woken up to Sturgeon's betrayal of the cause - after all, there's no chance of a referendum under the present regime anyway.

      PS Peter, I don't do twitter but what has Zarkwan been saying? I've seen claims that he's gone all yoon on us recently whereas I thought he had just given up in despair like Wings. Very disappointing if he's changed sides.

    6. Zarkwan has not gone unionist. He closed his account, and his handle was subsequently nicked by a unionist troll.

  5. Kirsty Blackman unchained is a horrific sight. A woman more interested in pronouns than Scottish independence. She was useless when Deputy leader at Westminster. The Britnats loved interviewing her on their TV programmes because she hadn't a clue about economics or anything practical about independence. Sadly she is not the only one like this in the SNP.

    The SNP spent an NEC meeting devising a long list of transphobia actions that will get you expelled from the SNP but ignore independence.

  6. Not sure if I can post comments anonymously. I've had experience of this sort of bullying in the workplace. Here, there seems to be a small cadre of bullies determined to get rid of JC. The difference is, in my experience it was dealt with and the bullies were cautioned. I don't see this happening here and it's sickening.

  7. I agree, the treatment of Joanna Cherry is disgraceful, and should shame tha SNP leadership. The list of SNP representatives and officials who I now strongly dislike is getting a long one - Kirsty Blackman, Alyn Smith, Pete Wishart, Stewart Macdonald, Mhairi Black, Kirsten Oswald, Mhairi Hunter, Fiona Robertson, Susan Ruddick etc. I can't recall names but there are more. And there are the nodding dogs at Holyrood and Westminster who keep their heads down but do nothing to discourage the bile and the bullying. What a depressing amount of sheer stupidity there is in the party, as well as nastiness. Recent fixing of the candidate selection process has not helped - SNP list MSP for us in the Highlands [a rare "success" for two-votes-SNP] is the awful Emma Roddick, an intellectual lightweight with a head full only of vacuous slogans. I speak as a passionate supporter of independence, now almost giving up [though I do respect those who soldier on in Alba or in the SNP itself].
    Incidentally, James, may I plead with you not to engage on twitter with the new unionist zarkwan. I appreciate that you are refuting his "arguments" but you know it will have no effect on him and is a waste of time, whilst letting him dominate sections of your twitter. [I am aware that you may reply that it's your twitter and you will choose what's in it - Stuart Campbell certainly would!]
    Sorry that you are getting angry intolerance and some abuse over the franchise issue. Is there no end to the self-induced troubles of the Yes movement?

  8. Peter N - they didn't feel any shame about their failed earlier attempt to smear Cherry with bullying accusations by staff at Westminster. As with Salmond their smears were shown to be false. These are not nice people working for Sturgeon and the people working for the boss tend to reflect the character of the boss.

  9. Whats the betting that by this time tomorrow Nicola Sturgeon will have something said something on camera along the lines of ' no matter what Alister Jack says the Scottish Government has a mandate ...blah blah blah, anti democratic blah blah blah, the tories will have no choice but to grant a second 30 blah blah blah.

    Its getting as predictable as the 'we will not be ripped out of Europe against our will' line from Blackford


      Adam, I saw the same charade being played out on debate night last Wednesday.

      Angus Robertson SNP MSP - we have a mandate for a referendum.

      Liz Smith Tory MSP - no you don't.

      Angus Robertson - we won the election and have a mandate to hold a referendum.

      Liz Smith - you didn't win a majority. You have no mandate.

      Angus Robertson - independence supporting parties won a majority.

      Liz Smith - you don't have a mandate.

      Angus Robertson - yes we do.

      Liz Smith - no you don't.

      Angus Robertson - yes we do.

      It reminded me of a Christmas panto. Clearly Robertson was practicing his lines when he takes over from Sturgeon.

      Robertson could have, said to break up the monotony, that Cameron only got 37% of the vote to say he had a mandate for the EU ref. But he did'nt.

      Robertson could have said we will have a referendum with or without your permission. But he did'nt.

      It's all a charade.


      1. The SNP/Greens say they are going to use their majority to pass a bill changing the electoral system at Holyrood to be just like at Westminster.

      2. This would mean that the SNP/ Greens would have a supermajority of MSPs at the next election if similar numbers of voters voted for them. This supermajority would make it very difficult for any Britnats to argue there is not a mandate.

      3. Unfortunately the Britnats stop the bill to change the voting system at Holyrood by getting the courts to say it is beyond the competence of the Scottish Parliament.

      4. So no it is not a solution to the independence standoff but it does show once again that Scotland is a colony in practical terms.

      5. It also shows that the way forward was an independence super majority within the current Holyrood system. It shows the folly of the both votes SNP approach and Sturgeon attacking Alba. You would almost think Sturgeon wanted this current standoff instead of a super majority. When you have Alister ( Union ) Jack quoting Sturgeon on TV calling the Greens as per Sturgeon calling Alba as gaming the system you kinda get the idea Sturgeon is working with the Britnats to minimise the validity of any majority never mind a supermajority.

    3. This supermajority would make it very difficult for any Britnats to argue there is not a mandate.

      The argument would be "you only have a supermajority because you changed the voting system to get it". What's so difficult about that? Not that the Greens would vote for it in the first place, since it would render them extinct.


    John (Redactor Man) Swinney says he fully respects the UK Supreme Courts decisions.

    These are the words of a devolutionalist. He is disappointed he says. Who thinks people like the Redactor man will actually deliver independence.

    Redactor man also said the devolution settlement does not give Scotland the powers it needs. Well no shit Swinney - who knew that. Whose fault is that then. Swinney was tasked after the VOW to enforce the promises made by the Britnats. His Smith Commission achievements were pathetic. Swinney is a useless devolutionalist. Sturgeons yes man - you want that redacted - no problem Nicola. You want that information/document hidden Nicola - no problem - thanks Nicola ( grovel grovel) for letting me help bring the Scottish parliament and a Scottish government in to disrepute - anything else to be disappeared Nicola. Sturgeon hands over a list of names. Swinney screams his delight.

    1. These UK Supreme Court decisions are more examples of how Westminster can take any independence referendum bill to the UK Supreme Court and probably have it deemed outside Holyrood 's competence. Hence the reason I and many others said a true party of independence would have used the May election as a vote for independence. But no the SNP fight the court case attempting to establish if Holyrood does have the legal competence to hold an independence refendum. Sturgeon and her gang are just chancers kicking the can down the road.

      When the Covid excuse runs dry then the "not carrying out an illegal referendum" excuse will be there as a backup. Before we know it many years will have passed and Sturgeon and Wishart will disappear with their nice pensions.

  11. A quick look at some of the tweets surrounding Blackman and her desire for a McCarthy style witch hunt throughout the SNP (and then probably the rest of Scottish society) makes me more convinced not to do Twitter.

    I would summarise the SNP as "sheep led by maniacs and crooks."

  12. In all seriousness James I wish I had never read that tweet of yours about Pension Pete Wishart. Why? Well I thought I'll go and have a look at this blog everyone is supposed to be talking about. Now assuming he does not have more than one blog he hardly has any posts at all. The most recent being 27th May and only 5 in total for the year.

    I mean really 5 posts. Lazy Pension Pete more like it.

    Not one of his posts promotes independence.

    Not one of his posts explains how Indyref2 is going to happen but we are expected to believe this numpty is for independence. He does of course say how it won't happen.

    His most recent posts are full on attacks on Salmond,Alba and independence bloggers. The entitlement just drips of the page. He (just like Labour in Scotland used to ) thinks he owns his voters. These are independence voters not party people and eventually they will see through people like Lazy Pension Pete.

    Wishart is a perfect example of everything that is wrong with today's SNP. If you object to books with child sex (phaedophiles call it grooming) being recommended reading in our state schools then you are socially conservative according to Lazy Pete.

    Don't know if Wishart is a crook but he certainly is a maniac. He will never do anything to achieve independence but I am sure he is enjoying his time in London working up his pension.

  13. The state of the independence movement has tragically become poisonous. I dare say there are darker forces partly responsible for this, but goodness me, there are far too many in the SNP who suffer from amnesia when recalling their core purpose.

  14. Sturgeon says " I have time on my side." So Independence is all about her.

    Sturgeon is a megalomaniac.

  15. Blackford to speak at an independence rally in Glasgow. Whats the buffoon going to say

    " Scotland will not be taken out of the EU against its will. "

    Perhaps someone should remind him it is more than 5 years since the EU referendum and more than 4 years since Sturgeon first said we were having Indyref2 due to the EU vote.

    1. To shouts of TOO LATE from the crowd in Glasgow Green Blackford announced there may be a referendum in 2023.

      Maybe ayes maybe naws as King Kenny would say.

  16. Remember when in a previous post I asked if the word had gone out to the cult that thou must not attend AUOB marches or risk excommunication from the SNP. Well the WGD numpties totally blanked the recent AUOB march but are now getting all excited over a march in Glasgow because Blackford is speaking at it. Will Blackford actually march and make the finish line in the Green. I doubt it. Is this an SNP approved march?

    Now the numpties are getting all excited over a march that has approval for 1,000 marchers. Yep thats right a paltry 1,000. Even Partick Thistle get more than that .

    The most pathetic comment by the numpties is by Hamish 100 who claims he is feeling a little bit more optimistic though. Obviously the 100 is not his IQ.

    I never thought when I last marched in Glasgow Jan 2020 through the pouring rain that less than 2 years later this would be the state of things.

    Oh and to the liars on WGD I have never said SNP politicians do not attend marches eg Joanna Cherry Edinburgh AUOB 2019 and many others Keith Brown, Tommy Shephard, Sandra White, Michelle Thomson and more. The main liar is the usual culprit the mad liar Skier.

    1. If it's not bad enough that Hamish the numpty is feeling encouraged by the amazing 😂😂😂 fact that Blackford is turning up to speak at an independence march in Glasgow with only 1000 marchers he also says as we move forward it is positivity that will take us forward. Move forward - unbelievable.

      SNP politicians used to turn up to speak at marches that had 100k marchers but numpty Hamish somehow sees this as the yes movement going forward. What a numpty.

      Sturgeon has split the yes movement and people like Kavanagh have contributed to this with his false positivity and his false forecasts.

  17. As a man who believes in Scottish Indy I am wondering if I have any rights to protect me from misandrists like Sturgeon and Blackman.